ReviewGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2025
The use of geographic information systems (GIS) in studying mental health service delivery: A scoping review.
Review in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Geographic information systems (GIS) are computer-based spatial mapping tools widely used in public health to examine service availability and access disparities and healthcare utilization. While GIS has supported evidence-based health planning in various domains, its application in mental healthcare service delivery remains underexplored. Our scoping review aimed to address this gap by exploring the scope and type of GIS usage in studying three dimensions of mental health (MH) service delivery (availability, accessibility and utilization), across all geographical locations, settings and populations. We conducted a scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. We included peer-reviewed English-language studies using GIS to examine service delivery (availability, accessibility or utilization) for any MH condition diagnosed through standardized criteria or validated tools. Seven databases were searched (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online [MEDLINE], PsycINFO, Excerpta Medica Database [Embase], Global Health, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL], Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL] and Web of Science) between January and April 2024. This review included 58 studies predominantly from high-income countries. A wide range of GIS methods were employed across studies, including hotspot analysis, network analysis and spatial analysis. Six studies explored availability, generally through measures like distribution of facilities across a population, and resource availability within 5-10-mile network buffers. Forty-six studies explored the spatial accessibility of MH services and substance-use treatment facilities using GIS. Six studies examined service utilization patterns. Equity emerged as a recurring theme across all three dimensions. GIS has the potential to emerge as a powerful tool in MH research, particularly in mapping disparities, informing service delivery and identifying high-risk zones. Expanding GIS use in trial design, implementation science and policy advocacy could help bridge critical gaps in MH service delivery, ensuring more equitable and data-driven decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.